Does anybody else find this wrong?
vintagetoppsguy
Posts: 871
0
vintagetoppsguy
Posts: 871
vintagetoppsguy
Posts: 871
Comments
randy
I also love the way that he says "no more paypal", but if you look at all of his past auctions, he has never accepted paypal.
He can also age cards to your liking and particular taste.
rasndy
Here's what you said in the other thread: "I understand what you and Lee are both trying to say. However, I do believe that there is a place in this hobby for reproductions. I have a Mastro T206 Honus Wagner that is a reprint. It displays very nicely with my other T206s. I don’t have the money for a real Wagner, but I have the next best thing. I also don’t have the money for a 1952 Topps set, but I have a reprint set, which is the next best thing. This hobby is full of reprint sets. The same thing applies with this ball. This hobby also has many reprint autos for people who can not afford the real thing - Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Lou Gehrig, etc. I think everybody is making a big deal about it because it looks so authentic - the signature looks EXACTLY like a Ruth, the ball is yellowed, shellacked, etc, just as you would expect on an authentic Babe Ruth signed ball. However, if it were a snow white, modern Major League Ball, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. What else would you want the seller to do to more accurately describe it as not being authentic? I don’t think he can do anymore than he has already done. It’s not like he said, “This may or may not be real. You decide” No, he used the word “repro” or “reproduction” 5 times within the listing. Again, I know what you are saying. Is there a way to stop it? I don’t have the answer. But if you use the logic that all repros should be destroyed to prevent fraud, then you must also come to the same conclusion that all unopened wax must be destroyed to prevent re-seals. "
As long as he repeatedly states it's a reprint in the auction, what harm is he doing, right?
<< <i>The seller indicates that it's a reprint in both the title line and in the desciption field. Absolutly no problem with that one. >>
My thoughts exactly.
<< <i>vintage- how many personalities do you have?
Here's what you said in the other thread: "I understand what you and Lee are both trying to say. However, I do believe that there is a place in this hobby for reproductions. I have a Mastro T206 Honus Wagner that is a reprint. It displays very nicely with my other T206s. I don’t have the money for a real Wagner, but I have the next best thing. I also don’t have the money for a 1952 Topps set, but I have a reprint set, which is the next best thing. This hobby is full of reprint sets. The same thing applies with this ball. This hobby also has many reprint autos for people who can not afford the real thing - Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Lou Gehrig, etc. I think everybody is making a big deal about it because it looks so authentic - the signature looks EXACTLY like a Ruth, the ball is yellowed, shellacked, etc, just as you would expect on an authentic Babe Ruth signed ball. However, if it were a snow white, modern Major League Ball, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. What else would you want the seller to do to more accurately describe it as not being authentic? I don’t think he can do anymore than he has already done. It’s not like he said, “This may or may not be real. You decide” No, he used the word “repro” or “reproduction” 5 times within the listing. Again, I know what you are saying. Is there a way to stop it? I don’t have the answer. But if you use the logic that all repros should be destroyed to prevent fraud, then you must also come to the same conclusion that all unopened wax must be destroyed to prevent re-seals. "
As long as he repeatedly states it's a reprint in the auction, what harm is he doing, right? >>
Lee,
Your whole contention behind the Ruth ball was that even though the seller was selling it as a "repro", "fake" or whatever, that it could possibly end up in the hands of someone who might try to pass it off as being legit. Am I right or wrong about that? After all, you did say,
<< <i>The fact is it's irresponsible to sell fake/counterfeit/reprinted items that will likely be resold as authentic. I'm not sure why you can't see that, but it's people like this seller that perpetuate the continuous flow of counterfits and forgeries in the hobby. Whether or not what they are doing is legal or whether they are disclosing all information about the item is irrelevant. >>
I am not here to re-hash our aregument on the Ruth ball. However, there is a big differnece in these two listings. For example, Perkdog pointed out (and I agree with him) that perhaps the Ruth ball, and all repros for that matter, should be marked as such. Well, these cards that are being sold were originally designed to be sold as reprints and were originally marked as such. However, the seller has removed the word "reprint" and has done his best to "age the cards." That is the difference.
Let me give you a better example. Lets say I have an old hot rod (just pick any) that has been restored, but everything is not original. I have restored it to what would have been close to the original condition, but the engine and transmission were replaced so that now all the numbers do not match. I want to sell it at auction (ebay or whatever) and describe it as, "being restored, but not all original - no matching numbers." There would be nothing wrong with that. This would be the case with the Ruth ball.
However, lets say I had the same car (still with no matching numbers), but before I sold it, I filed down all the numbers and had them re-stamped to what would have been the original numbers. And lets say that I describe it as "restored with matching numbers - but restamped." Even though I described it accurately, this is just begging for somebody to buy it and try to re-sell it as all original and in this case I have already done the work for them. Just as the case with these cards.
I guess that is where I see the difference in the two. The seller of the Ruth ball is selling it as exactly as he bought it (or so he says), but the seller of the cards is "aging" them and removing the word "reprint" before he sells them. Maybe my example above was not the best and I may have rambled on, but my point is one was marked and the markings removed (cards) and the other was never marked (ball)!
I know we all have different values and ethics, but I just can't bring myself to sell something I know there is a good chance will be used to harm someone else in any way down the line. If guys like these had a similar value system, there wouldn't be a market for crap like this and people could buy stuff without worrying if it's fake.
"ok retard these are licensed reprints not counterfeits if someone is so dumb they cant tell the difference between an authenic and a reprint they need to find a new hobby,i do feel good about my self im not ripping anyone off and by the way ive sold nearly 10,000 reprints over the last couple of years and never once have i heard oof one of my cards being passed of as original,it wouldnt happen the ink and cardstock are totally different maybe if you were a little more knowledgible with cards you would know that have a nice day,just a side note this mickey mantle card is reprinted by topps its not even the size of the originals its from the 1952 topps reprint set which was issued in 1983 and there have been exactly zero passed off as originals so keep brushing up einstein"
Snorto~
You should email that dork back and tell him that they are no longer "licensed reprints" once he removes the word "reprint." I wonder if that violates any law? Maybe copyright laws? Afterall, they have to legally be stamped "reprint" in order to sell them in the first place and it seems like to alter that would be breaking some kind of law. Kind of like removing you mattress tag - just kidding. But seriously, anybody know anything about that?
I bet if Topps knew about it, they would do something about it! Seems like they could get it pulled!
Michael Vick's Dog Fighting 08 ???
:Edited to add : I know this guy got to be pullin my legs, but that's funny as hell .
As for the Reprints and Repro Auto's, I agree with Mr.CDsNuts, it's just lining someone else up down the road to be taken for a ride .
I can completely understand not being able to afford the authentics and just wanting the next best thing , but the way this hobby is , you know it is just a matter of time before someone tries to get one by on you .
Personally a repro wouldn't do it for me in any way shape or form , either would a forged baseball .